On colour

[Ulf Pettersson <ulf obsession se>]

I have followed your discussion around colour for sometime now.

Your proposals include too many too diverse colours.

This last picture:
http://www.mindspring.com/~digitect/gnome/colors-stevehall-01.png
includes about 9 different hues. Some of them are more or less complimentary
while others are quite close. All in all, they cannot (and do not) match. All
expression is based on relationsships between differences and similarities and
if you include colours in a almost random way it is hard to get meaning across
(unless visual uncertainty/randomness itself is the point).  

Basically, choose colours in a way that give them a clear relationship; either
they may be close in hue(i generally don't like that) or they may be
complimentary (opposite in hue) (i tend to choose color more in that way, most
other designers seem to as well). The point is that you have to have a some sort
of 'drama' in your colour selection or it will not be effective. For example, a
drama is cleary created between reds and greens, but if you also add blues and
yellows the effect is lost.

I'd advise you restrict yourselves to two (possibly three) main colors for major
graphic elements, excluding black and white. If you want more colours, create
subtle variantions from one or two of the ones you have chosen. If we look at
the picture above: If you remove the last three columns from the picture
(yellow, blue, green), I would say you have a good set of colours to work with
(other combinations are possible). 

I like the colour-scheme of Gnome. At least compared to the design of most free
software. Too me the Gnome colour scheme seems a very strong element of the
Gnome brand and it would be a shame to loose it (without a clearly superior
alternative). To me it is also obvious that the site should reflect the colours
of the desktop. Every major non-free, consumer OS uses their desktops visual
appearance in their branding (MacOS, BeOS and Windows increasingly), and they
are right about it.

I dont think the Gnome icons or the Gnome colour-scheme are that great. They are
a little too murky, too similar in colour and the icons are sometimes somewhat
poorly rendered. But for free software they are really not bad. I really detest
the look of KDE. It looks unprofessional, childish and hackerish in a bad
(non-elegant) sense. Between KDE and Gnome, Gnome _looks_ like a much more
though-over and professional environment. Largely because of its icons, other
graphic details and the subtle and consistent colour-scale. 

I'd hate to flame anyone but the current design of the Gnome site (front page)
does not really suit my taste (or professional opinion). Mostly because it is
hard to read, too diffucult to understand where to click and has too much
graphics but also because the colours (bright pink, blue and green) make me
think of My Little Pony or icecream and are not consistent with the Gnome
colours. I think the previous site was better (as I remember it) and was
surprised by the change, which was a step in the opposite direction of most
website design (where flexibility, utility, useability, download speed and
design elements well adjusted for the web are gaining ground).


Ulf Pettersson
Designer